This is the forum for discussion of all cricketing issues and news. Here you will find frank analysis and opinion on subjects ranging from selection policies, favourite cricketers and match post-mortems right through to dressing room and cricket board fiascos.

Paddles wrote:Isn't Freddie Mercury the first and last Indian Rock Star?

bit of a stretch to label him 'Indian' considering he wasn't born there. His ancestry was Persian.

Well he certainly wasn't Iranian. Indo-Persian is a thing, with Pakistan (Sindh) and Urdu language being significant. But Gujarat (India) is significant as well. Parsis settled here many many centuries ago. May explain the dry culture in Gujarat.

I'm no Freddie Mercury biographer, I'm just reading wikipedia, apparently he was born on a Persian Island off coast of Africa, but his parents were from Gujarat, despite being Parsis, and he apparently spent a lot of time growing up in India, including most if not all his schooling. That gives rise to the Indian claim. You can decide your own merits. I don't have a dog in this fight.

Culturally it would seem he was Parsi blood growing up in India, born to Indo-Persians who themselves were born in India? So - a Persian from India just born offshore, or a Persian who spent time in India? I think you could well be placing too much emphasis to his birthplace and his being Persian culturally when it was Gujurat and he spent his childhood there as were his ancestors born there. But like I say, I don't care to debate this one. Perhaps I ought to have said - isn't Freddie Mercury the last Rock Star from India? Indian as an ethnicity and religion (Sikh, Hindi) as distinct from Persian migration to India and the India region by land itself are different. And a Persian is a Persian, just sometimes its an Indo-Persian. I did mean the land and not the ethnicity or Sikh/Hindi religious cultures but I see your point and agree with it tho on a slight talking past me meaning.

State of Origin eligibility is enough for me just to say let the players determine when they're from, (but stop picking Kiwis. )

"Your inclination to assume and contradict is typical of Narcissism which is nothing about being pretty like the Narcissus fable."

Paddles wrote:Ethnicity and geneology, not indigenous peoples but long time citizens is the distinction between Indo Persian and Indo Indians (Sikh Hindi etc) trying to be made.

Wrong. You have no idea on how important it is for not to call "Hindi" for a "Hindu". Next time you pass a South Indian ask him. I don't have patience to explain/argue with you on trivial things

Read the conversation between myself and Katto again. You want to add your point of difference between hindi as against hindu, do so clearly. But given Freddie Mercury was neither hindi nor hindu, the care factor is going to be low. Really low.

If you want yo say hindi is the language and hindu the religion or ethnicity - do so. If its something else - be clear. Remember - we're Anglo Europeans, not Indians. We're not going to expect you to know a Celt from a Saxon from an Aboriginee or a Maori let alone a polynesian from a micronesian.

"Your inclination to assume and contradict is typical of Narcissism which is nothing about being pretty like the Narcissus fable."

I was talking ethnicity tho. If the word is Hindu and not Hindi as I in fact expressly anticipated - I thank you. But it has no bearing on my and Katto's conversation in the least. I have no doubts you are more well versed in Indian culture than I or almost all Anglo's are.

"Your inclination to assume and contradict is typical of Narcissism which is nothing about being pretty like the Narcissus fable."